u/Sheikh-Pym

Allah Jalla Jalaluhu says in the Qur’an:

أَلَمْ تَعْلَمْ أَنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَهُۥ مُلْكُ ٱلسَّمَـٰوَٰتِ وَٱلْأَرْضِ ۗ وَمَا لَكُم مِّن دُونِ ٱللَّهِ مِن وَلِىٍّۢ وَلَا نَصِيرٍ

“Do you not know that to Allāh belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and [that] you have not besides Allāh any protector or any helper?” (Baqarah:102)

What does it mean by taking the Constitution as one’s Protector (Waliyy)?

When a Muslim is struck by disaster or injustice, he seeks help from Allah and only Allah. This is a Muslim who does not compromise on his Tawheed and does not associate anyone or anything as partners with Allah. However, when one seeks or expects help from the country’s law or the Constitution before Allah when wronged, this is a person who takes the law or the Constitution as his Protector (Waliyy), knowingly or unknowingly.

Muslims of this country cling to the Constitution and the justice system whenever they are wronged even if it is the law itself that wrongs them. This originates from their induced belief that the law (the country’s law) is above all, which itself is shirk to have faith in. The specific belief is that the Constitution is an entity that is capable of holding anyone accountable, and none escapes its justice. Though they do not affirm the said belief, it is implied by their strong adherence to the national law and the blind and unwavering trust in the justice system.

Looking at the current time, when the Constitution failed to intercept the election of a tyrant three times in a row, not much has changed about Muslims when it comes to their blind adherence to the Constitution. How many incidents have happened just in the past few weeks, and we have only ourselves to blame and hope that something will give us justice. But it hasn’t been in our favour so far.

The criminals are out of jail before they even serve the punishment the law gives them, which is already unjust enough, such as the terrorist Monu Manesar. The criminals are in the military service, where they have nothing to restrain them from spilling the blood of the Muslims and violating our muslim sisters (May Allah's curse be upon those evil people). The criminals are in administrative positions where they can utilise the very law to make our lives hell. And yet we think that the law has any power or authority to hold these people accountable.

Recently, a case unfolded where a Muslim sister was molested by a Hijda Dal dog Tarun Kumar, and following that incident, her brother gave him what he deserved. As a consequence of this action by the Muslim man, his house has now been bulldozed.

However, this is the reaction of the Muslims who take the Constitution as their Waliyy regarding his house being demolished:

https://preview.redd.it/4ubaokirn6tg1.jpg?width=750&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=db6f983ee571dbbff2806ab0347b1d1e4b3aeda4

Look at how he emphasises his words! What justice are they talking about? Even if the actions of the Muslim man were considered wrong (which, they weren't), how is demolishing his house justice? What was the crime of his family members that they were punished?

And following such a statement, they go on to demand justice for the endless list of Muslim victims like Athar Hussain, Unaiz Khan, and Roshan Khatoon to name just a few of the most recent ones that received coverage, even though not on national media but on independent media. Yet cases such as Tarun’s are discussed for days, if not weeks, on national television and celebrity social media, while only presenting the narrative from their own side. They demand justice from the same authorities who perpetrate injustice, even when covering their news?

At this point, some might be confused about whether seeking justice from the national judiciary itself counts as taking the Constitution or the law as their protector (Waliyy). The answer, then, is no.

If both Reliance and Compliance (or Obedience) are given to the Constitution in their absolute sense, then that is what counts as taking it as one’s Waliyy; since these are the two conditions that a servant fulfills in order to take Allah as one’s Protector (Al-Waliyy). He relies completely on the judgement of Allah and is Obedient to the law of Allah.

Reliance on the Constitution is when someone gives it the right to fair judgement when someone is wronged. It is when one is fully content with the judgement and punishment that the law legislates for both the wronged and the wrongdoer as a whole, and believes that it holds authority much higher than the lawmaker(s) themselves.

Compliance with the Constitution means being blindly sure of its correctness. Being critical of breaking the law and of those who break it, whatever the law may be. To abandon one’s own rights given by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), i.e., to get due justice through one’s own hands, and instead make the law the ultimate judge. To surrender to even one judgement that goes against the justice of Shariah of Allah.

It goes without saying that this disease exists due to the introduction of secularism among the Muslims. This poison has been spreading for a very long time, and our brothers and children are taught to accept it in educational institutes, even in Madrasas. What it does is make Muslims delusional, thinking that the mere presence of a word in the Constitution makes us safe and protected. However, when we are harmed on the basis of communal hatred, it still doesn’t break our delusion. We still go out on the streets and raise banners asking for the constitutional rights to be upheld. This is like making salah towards this man-made deity, seeking protection from it.

The following words by Allama Iqbal in his “Hindi Islam” summarises this calamity in two critical lines.

ملا کو جو ہے ہند میں سجدے کی اجازت

ناداں یہ سمجھتا ہے کہ اسلام ہے آزاد

[Mulle ko jo hai Hind me sajde ki ijazat

Naadan yeh samajhta hai ki Islam hai azaad]

Exegesis of the verse: “Mohammad Iqbal says in this verse, that the mullah or the Islamic priest, in India, when given the bare minimum permission of performing his prayers and porstrating in his mosque, comes to believe that Islam has gained emancipation. Iqbal calls such a ‘Mullah’ as ‘Nadaan’, meaning foolish, because the freedom to practice Islam does not merely mean having the permission to pray salah privately; instead, it includes all its facets like the fredom of the Muslims to hold staunch Islamic opinions without being belittled or persecuted for it, the execution of all other practices of the deen wihtout fear of oppression, and the establishment of Shari’ah ordained by Allah (Subhanahu wa ta’ala), among other facets. However, as Iqbal suggests- the present condition is such that the Muslims, when allowed the bare minimum, fall into and illogically optimistic stance that all of Islam has been emancipated.”